Taking to the Streets

I posted this originally on Tumblr in response to another poster who was excited to see the young people of Iran fighting to take their country back from 30 years of oppression and fundamentalism. I see that possibility too, but I can't really help but see that with three levels of observational bias in play. Besides, being a misanthrope and cynic means I don't buy into the hype of hope. Ever.
===
I agree that we’re seeing a lot of young people expressing their anger and resentment and desire for change. These brave souls - and I think they are nothing if not brave and a also little righteous - are risking life for the pursuit of liberty and happiness. I sit here, comfortable in my western lifestyle and struggling to remember how long it’s been since I felt the hot passion for justice burn so hot I needed to do something. Needed to march, scream, protest, fight. It’s been a long time.

But we’ve got a double dose of observational bias - actually a triple dose - acting here. First off, we’ve got our own prejudices coloring what we see. Then we’ve got the media choosing what to show us, framing their narratives in ways that are compelling and speak to their audience. Finally and most significantly, we only see the young people who are expressing their anger and resentment.

We don’t see any of the young people who think things have been hunky-dory under the mullahs, who think the regime is swell. Are they a small minority? Or are they, to repurpose a hideous moniker, a silent majority? We don’t know and really can’t know. We can’t know because Iran isn’t open. Which, depending on the answer, might be very ironic. If the protesters represent a relatively small and vocal minority, it would be in Iran’s best interests to show us that. But that would require them to be an open and free society. And who’d be protesting then?

The AP throws a temper tantrum

Lawyers from the AP cried like little bitches this past weekend and told Drudge Retort to take down "seven items that contained quotations from A.P. articles ranging from 39 to 79 words." Wah, wah, wah. You stole my words. I mean, you didn't plagiarize, and you included links to the articles, but wah, wah wah!

This piece in the Times (who are NOT a bunch of whiny bitches and therefore probably won't complain that I've quoted Saul Hansell's article) says the AP has slightly backed off of their earlier position, hoping to set guidelines on quoting. But don't think it'll be easy. I mean, those AP writers know how to distill:

“It’s hard to see how the Drudge Retort ‘first few lines’ is a substitute for the story,” Mr. Wu said.

Mr. Kennedy argued, however, that The Associated Press believes that in some cases, the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words.

The AP should probably be careful what they say. If I were a managing editor of a newspaper, I'd be asking why I have to pay so much for print rights when one or two sentences is all that matter. I'd start demanding massive discounts.

My Media Week Meme

Huh. I'm usually so careful. I always wear protection when I blog. I never get tagged. Oh well, best to go to the free clinic and get a shot. Fortunately this one'll be cleared up in a few days.

Mike at A Mike Life tagged me with this meme, so here goes:

Books:
I've got multiples in play as usual. Finally decided I should read H.G. Bissinger's Friday Night Lights, so that arrived the other day. Of course, TheWife pulled it off the stack first. I'll see if I can't pry it away by the weekend. I just finished volumes one and two of Mark Andreyko's Manhunter on a recommendation, and was pretty entertained. Plus, I've got to catch up on Y: The Last Man. All said though, I think the next book I'll pull and read is probably Carry On, Jeeves by Wodehouse.

TV:
Lots and not so lots. I'm a couple weeks behind on Breaking Bad, so I need to catch up on that. There are UConn games be watched, Gonzaga games to be watched, and...well...not much else on the tube right now. At some point this month there should be a production of Sondheim's Company on my PBS affiliate, so I'll have that, and there are still four more episodes of Cupid to rewatch along with Alan Sepinwall and the rest of the Strike Survival TV Club. And in a few months, fates allow, new television again, including BSG.

Music:
This is the easiest. Not much new for me right now. I've got Dean Gray's American Edit spinning in the car stereo, might switch over to Live'r Than You'll Ever Be from the Kleptones if the mood strikes me, and I've got a bunch of episodes of the Coverville podcast backed up on my 'puter at work.


Now that I've been infected, I've got to touch five others...
Michele
Michael
Jared (who really doesn't post often enough)
Kari
Tosy

The relatively few fans of Don Imus

CoyoteSqrl So I'm in the gym this morning and there's that guy reading the newspapers on tv...
Thick Rick¹ Sandy Rivers?
CS No. The old bald dude on C-SPAN. Anyway, he's reading the papers and...
TR Oh yah, that guy. He ain't gonna bag no band camp freaks. Am I right, dude? High five!
CS Sure. Whatever.² You want to hear the rest of this? Anyway, he gets to a story in the Wall Street Journal³ - front page, above the fold - about the "digital brush fire" behind the firing of Don Imus. Right there in the first sentence is the money line: "relatively few people were tuned into the [show]". A little later in the article, however, we find out about the "millions of fans" of the "hugely popular" broadcast. The fuck? Just how incompetent are the editors of the WSJ to let this contradiction slip? Or is it just on April 4 that "relatively few" bothered to listen?
TR Dude, it's just the Journal.
CS TR, keep up. I know you stick to Maxim, but the Journal's...oh. Huh. Sometimes you're not so dense, you know?

---

¹ The ladies all call him that. What's ironic is that he thinks it's a compliment.
² I'm convinced "The Todd" is based on TR.
³ If nothing else, the Journal knows its mission is all about money, so the full article's locked behind the subscriber firewall, unfortunately.